MADAN versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

MADAN versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

The Supreme Court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the offences under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and affirmed conviction; the facts constituted a rarest of rare case but, having regard to mitigating factors including the convict Madan’s age, long period in custody, prison conduct and possibility of reform, and parity considerations with co-accused, the Court commuted Madan’s death sentence to actual imprisonment for a fixed term of 20 years without remission (including time already undergone), while dismissing Sudesh Pal’s appeal (leaving his sentence of life imprisonment intact).

Parties
Appellant: Madan; Appellant: Sudesh Pal; Accused: Ishwar; Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court — Final Judgment on Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals disposed: conviction under Section 302 IPC affirmed; death sentence of Madan commuted to 20 years imprisonment without remission; appeal of Sudesh Pal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Murder, Section 302 IPC, Section 149 IPC, Rarest of Rare Doctrine, Sentencing, Commutation of Death Sentence, Eye Witness Evidence, Investigation and Recovery
Criminal Law Capital Punishment Evidence Law Murder Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC Rarest of Rare Doctrine Sentencing +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 45 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madan

Appellant

Sudesh Pal

Appellant

Ishwar

Accused

State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court — Final Judgment on Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the case for conviction under Section 302 IPC
  2. 2 Whether the present case falls in the category of rarest of rare cases
  3. 3 Whether the capital punishment imposed on the appellant Madan should be maintained or commuted

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the offences under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and affirmed conviction; the facts constituted a rarest of rare case but, having regard to mitigating factors including the convict Madan’s age, long period in custody, prison conduct and possibility of reform, and parity considerations with co-accused, the Court commuted Madan’s death sentence to actual imprisonment for a fixed term of 20 years without remission (including time already undergone), while dismissing Sudesh Pal’s appeal (leaving his sentence of life imprisonment intact).

Court Disposition

Appeals disposed: conviction under Section 302 IPC affirmed; death sentence of Madan commuted to 20 years imprisonment without remission; appeal of Sudesh Pal dismissed.

Orders

  • Criminal Appeal No.1790 of 2017 filed by appellant Sudesh Pal is dismissed
  • Criminal Appeal Nos. 1381-1382 of 2017 filed by appellant Madan are partly allowed